>>3717277lel, i've considered that argument in the past, but at this point when the smartphone in your pocket is burning through what, 4000mah a day? Every day? For 2 or 3 years? When 20 years ago a flip phone burned through 1/9th of that? And the landline you had 5 years before that was powered just by the current in the copper lines? Who gives a fuck about an extra megabyte?
I'm a motherfucker who didn't own a car for ten goddamned years and rode my bike everywhere, but the freight ship that transported my camera from Japan contributed more CO2 to the atmosphere in one trip than I have in my whole life.
I take navy showers (turn the water on, get wet, turn it off and lather up, turn the water back on to rinse off), but Intel, who made the chip in my computer and basically every CPU i've ever used in 35 years of living, uses more water in ONE DAY in one fabrication plant (and they have many) than me and my entire nuclear family (and my sibling's spouses!) will use in daily 10 minute showers throughout our lifetimes. I did the math. There is no exaggeration. It would take me about 195,000 showers to use the same amount of water that Intel does in one day.
We are way past the point of ever getting "Greener", and every overture in that direction is laughably naive. Economic development is literally tied to climate change. This is a physics problem, not something that can be solved with better technology or by using smaller jpegs (lmao). Every action we undertake, every little new technological marvel, every mile driven to work just ratchets the noose a little tighter around our neck.
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/ 
